The latest attack strategy involves race and claims of segregation. One
article now making the rounds is the following from liberal website
Salon. The quiet whisper is "See, look, charter schools segregate,
they're so terrible aren't they?"

What better way, at a point of heightened racial tension in our
country, with Ferguson, MO and Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice,
and others to capitalize on this tension and accuse charter schools of
segregation?

I work in the state's charter school sector, and am continually
disheartened by the attempts made to discredit the work and effort of
school leaders and teachers. The overriding focus of the work in the
charter sector is on raising the academic achievement level and future
opportunities of students. At present, most of the students enrolled in
charter schools are minority and/or students identified as eligible for
free or reduced lunch. And that work and movement - to provide
disadvantaged students with a stronger education and an opportunity for a
brighter future - is strong and growing even stronger and expanding to
more students as thousands of families continue to choose charter
schools. Families continue to choose charter schools and demand more of
them in Nashville and Tennessee because these schools are serving
students well and delivering on the mission of providing a strong
education and preparation for the future.

I'm disheartened not really because many of these people being attacked
are my friends and colleagues, but mainly disheartened because it's such
a huge distraction and waste of time and energy to dispel the
misinformation being put out publicly from these critics. Charters
enroll about 6% of the student population in Nashville and a little less
than 2% of all students statewide. I think "why all the attacks when we
need to be figuring out how to better educate the 100%?"

Forget the "We Are the 99% campaign" (against the 1%). In education, I'm
going to propose we have the "FOR 100% campaign" (and not continually
attack the 6%). We should all be working to further professionalize
teaching and learning communities or figuring out how to improve
instructional quality in all schools - charter and district alike -
rather than spending time trying to spread a false narrative of how
charter schools are out to re-segregate our country. It's not true. It's
stupid reasoning and it's counterproductive to intentionally
mischaracterize other people's motives.

I have found no charter school staff member or school leader or a
governing board member or a philanthropic supporter of charter schools, I
repeat absolutely nobody who has ever come off to me as segregationist.
Not even remotely close. In fact, my experience is the exact opposite.
Many in the charter movement in Nashville and Memphis work exhaustively
on issues of equity and justice for minority and disadvantaged youth,
and have very intentional and deep desires to improve communities and
neighborhoods.

A few things to keep in mind when articles like this come out:

1. Charter school laws and experiences are very unique to each state.

Generalizing things about charter schools - their successes or their
warts - is somewhat a waste of time when done on a national level or
simplistically across states. Critics do this often.

Every state that has charter schools has its own charter law. This means
that each state has a unique set of guidelines around charter school
issues, things like enrollment (who can attend charters), who can
operate charters (for profit or non profit providers), things like
charter school authorizer oversight and accountability or even who can
authorize charters (many states let colleges and universities, state
boards of education AND local districts authorize charter schools).

Tennessee passed its charter school law in 2002. The first charter
legislation was passed in Minnesota in 1992. So Tennessee had 10 years
to learn from other states before implementing its law. They crafted a
strong law that was mindful of lessons learned based on mistakes and
strengths of other state laws. The law has continued to be updated.

2. It's worth examining actual history and experience in Tennessee charter schools
Critics capitalize on the fact that most people are into the one minute
news cycle. Read 1 article on Salon or a social media opinion post and
you've got all the facts.

Not quite.

Tennessee passed its charter school law only in 2002 largely because
there were many years prior of very strong opposition to charter schools
by the TEA, one of the most powerful forces year in and year out at the
State Legislature. Look just south of us for something similar. Alabama
still does not have a charter school law mainly because of the very
very powerful teacher's union in Alabama.

TEA's fervent opposition to charter schools has continued over the years
and continues today (although it's a bit ironic when you think about it
because charter schools give their teachers more coaching and support
and often better pay, core issues the TEA is regularly supporting).
When the law did pass in 2002, TEA opposition was still heavily
present, and so the original charter law contained a cap on the number
of charter schools that could exist statewide, and charter schools were
only allowed to enroll a very small subset of the overall student
population in Tennessee.

Charter schools could only enroll students assigned to schools that
failed to meet AYP (remember NCLB?) or enroll a student that failed to
test proficient or advanced on TCAP math or reading. The law was later
amended to allow students who qualified for free and reduced price lunch
to enroll. Only in 2011 did the law change to allow any student in Tennessee to attend a charter.

So for nearly a decade - charter schools
served those students that the TN charter law said they could serve.
Students that went to schools that didn't meet AYP, weren't proficient
or advanced on TCAP or those that qualified for free and reduced price
lunch. And you guessed it, those students were and are predominantly
minority students. It was these students, and only these students, who
could attend charter schools in Tennessee for a long time.So if we remember actual history from our
local context, and understand the effects public policy has on school
enrollment patterns, it's fair to say that the legislative efforts
backed by the TEA over the years in Tennessee were a driving force in
concentrating a higher population of minorities and free and reduced
lunch students in the state's charter schools.

It's true that today TN charter schools serve a higher percentage of
minorities and students eligible for free and reduced when compared with
traditional district schools. Again, that largely reflects the
legislative constraints in the law that existed on charter school
operators for many years, and not Tennessee charter school operators
intentionally trying to cordon off poor and minority students into
charter schools.

In the few years since 2011, charter schools on the whole are becoming
less concentrated with minorities and high poverty students. Or put
another way, charter schools have become less "segregated" with a fully open enrollment policy.
This is a good thing, as many education policy studies and research
show that concentrating poor and minority students in any type of school
- district run or charter - concentrates the challenges of educating
this subgroup of students and on the whole, achievement levels are often
lower when disadvantaged students are highly concentrated in the same
school.

Concentrating minorities or high poverty students into schools, district
run or charter, via public policy at the state or city level is often a
recipe for low student achievement. In spite of this experience and
very damaging effect, many Tennessee charter schools have been able to
defy the odds over the years even while serving concentrated minority
and high poverty student populations. These charter schools have shown
strong graduation rates and very high achievement indicators. Students
leave these schools more rounded and better prepared for their futures.
Yes, there have been low performing charters, but the charter school
concept and the key element of accountability associated with charter
schools has allowed these low performing charters to be shuttered or
quickly reformed.

Charter schools are not out to segregate students. They are in fact out
to prove that demography is not not destiny. So let's move on from
empty arguments and inflammatory race based claims, and focus our work
and efforts on improving all of our schools for 100% of the students
that need to be served.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Disclaimer

As the author of A Disgruntled Republican I often post items which I think may be of interest to the conservative, Republican, libertarian or the greater community. Posting of a press release or an announcement of an event does not necessarily indicate an endorsement. Rod

The above space is for rent.

Email to discuss renting the above space or other placement of ads on this blog. Rodwilliams47@yahoo.com